Hungarian Science Academy was launching thefollowing month and, he joked: `I guess it will killme for the next twenty years.'

The encyclopaedia's entries would come from

the `first circle' of leading experts in the fields. Eachwould be given separate shadow links to the bestHungarian and non-Hungarian sources ­ the `secondcircle'.The `third circle' would be user commentary.Nyíri explained: `Imagine someone who believes thatthe moon is made of green cheese. If our leadingastrophysicist has an entry that the moon is madeof rocks and so on, then, in the third round, our userhas the opportunity to say "no, it is made of greencheese" and everyone interested can read it.'

Thus, the encyclopaedia would produce a virtual

community of users, he said, explaining: `Without thatfeedback, all we have done is just put something onthe Web. But, with feedback, it becomes a kind of com-munity with experts on the one side and non-profess-ionals on the other, all sort of bound up in a healthyinteraction ­ at least this is what I am hoping for!'

He conceded that the idea had its risks, adding the

sobering thought: `As long as it is about the moonand green cheese it's OK. But, when it is concern-ing the reality of Auschwitz, for instance, then thesituation gets difficult. I have no good answer. I justhope and pray that the crucial issues do not comeup too early.'

The Edinburgh 13 turned to its recommendations.

Virtual communities were not just luxuries, theythought, but they needed clear visions of their pur-pose.There was value in a fluid, but clear, divisionbetween professional and non-professional commu-nities with aims that the two should interact.

To begin, the institution must recruit its keenest

members, with passionate interest in their subjectsand skills to pass that on to their constituents. Usersmust be left in no doubt about the subject underdiscussion and its boundaries.There must be sternobservance of professional, academic and disciplinarystandards in order to earn and retain public trust. Asthe Moderator said: `The only way to say somethingis trustworthy is to have an institution in whichpeople have trust.'

G

REY

G

HOST OF

C

ULTURAL

H

ERITAGE

T

he Forum 13 was beginning to think its pur-pose had been served. But then it grounded on

librarian or gallery boss with `deep physical traditionsthat are resisting change and modification'. He con-ceded that they did business through e-mailboxes andWebsites that they regarded as useful adjuncts to theirreal activity but, he went on:

`What we as a group of renegades sitting here are

saying is, well, virtual activity can be as legitimate interms of our societal mission as the physical stuff.'

Warming to his subject, the museologist went on:

`Personally, this is the challenge I face. I know howto put something up on the Web and identify it sothat a naive user will recognise it and hopefullyderive benefit from it.What I do not know is howto get to the morons in the museum sector whorefuse to realise that digitality has a cultural value.'

Israeli curator Hazan tried to lighten the mood

with a cheerful `the good thing is that they retire',but Dr Karp was not to be mollified. `The danger isthat museums become irrelevant in the meantime.'

The world was filling with young people who

knew how to meet physical and digital needswithout any institutional help, he said. If culturalheritage institutions wished to retain relevance, theymust assume control of the situation not as theywished it to be but as it really was.

The Doctor of Philosophy went on: `We need

to help our institution siblings despite themselvesbecause, if we fail, we are going to see ourinstitutional relevance dwindle.To continue beingperceived as important to society demands thatinstitutions address the issues that we are here todayto talk about.We are convinced about all this, buthow do we go about convincing everybody else?'

Fortunately, he had an answer.The Luddite radicals

could be convinced that `we are not turning ourbacks on the living tradition, the bearers of whichwe are', he said. `We are simply accommodating thosetraditions to present today's circumstances which,because they were inconceivable fifty years ago,obviously aren't reflected in traditions.'

The Moderator was encouraging, too. Libraries

and museums had changed widely in the past 300years, even in the last 20 years. He concluded: `Thechanging communication environment obviouslyinduces changes in the functions of these institu-tions ­ it would be strange if it did not.To put itdifferently: it is silly to believe that it doesn't!'